Bad Beat Jackpot Tables

    • salflip
      salflip
      Bronze
      Joined: 02.10.2007 Posts: 606
      Are they more or less profitable than regular cash games as I've heard they attract a lot of fish?

      what adjustments should you make when playing at these tables?

      and how much should the jackpot be before you decide to play?
  • 20 replies
    • Roya1flush
      Roya1flush
      Bronze
      Joined: 10.12.2007 Posts: 306
      well you have to undersatnd one thing on these tables, you will get a lot of players playing weak hands and lots of connected hands such as 7 :spade: 8 :spade: etc..

      Also most of the time jackpots hit around $150000 - $250000 and around this time you get lots of people playing on jackpot tables..

      It could be very profitable if you play your normal game and dont get sucked into playing weak hands or marginal hands.. and as always keep in mind your positional play..
    • anstaendig
      anstaendig
      Bronze
      Joined: 05.11.2006 Posts: 3,833
      When the jackpot get high you'll find many fishes on these tables. The problem is that the rake is higher than on normal tables. I think you should play a session on the jackpot tables and look at your Tracker stats if you winrate gets smaller...
    • chenny8888
      chenny8888
      Bronze
      Joined: 03.10.2007 Posts: 19,324
      sure, winrate gets smaller. i would NOT suggest playing more suited connector type hands though. just play your normal game :) . if some mod can link to the german article detailing EV calculations based on size of the jackpot, ty.
    • SonicXT
      SonicXT
      Bronze
      Joined: 15.06.2007 Posts: 4,736
      You think it would be ok to start with BBJ tables at NL100SH ?
      At NL25 and 50, I found the contribution way too high for anything to compensate it (more fishes etc)
    • swissmoumout
      swissmoumout
      Bronze
      Joined: 23.02.2007 Posts: 3,385
      http://www.pokerstrategy.com/de/forum/thread.php?threadid=49822

      Those are calculations of when it's +EV to sit at a jackpot table, purely for the jackpot. But since they're usually more fishy than the normal ones, you dont have to follow this exactly
    • salflip
      salflip
      Bronze
      Joined: 02.10.2007 Posts: 606
      Is there any possibility of someone explaing this to me in english please?
    • swissmoumout
      swissmoumout
      Bronze
      Joined: 23.02.2007 Posts: 3,385

      The following tables show when it is +EV to sit at BBJ tables just for the jackpot:

      BBJ Level Required for +EV: Level Limit Full - Short Handed
      $0.10-$0.25 NL____$275,000 - $263,000
      $0.25-$0.50 NL____$330,000 - $328,000
      $0.50-$1.00 NL____$331,000 - $349,000
      $1-$2 NL_________$317,000 - $337,000
      $2-$4 NL_________$322,000 - $307,000
      $3-$6 NL_________$310,000 - $295,000


      $0.50-$1 Limit_____$375,000 - $377,000
      $1-$2 Limit_______$323,000 - $316,000
      $2-$4 Limit_______$324,000 - $314,000
      $3-$6 Limit_______$325,000 - $314,000
      $5-$10 Limit______$321,000 - $328,000
      $10-$20 Limit_____$324,000 - $327,000
      $15-$30 Limit_____$341,000 - $338,000

      The first column is for full-ring games, the second for short handed

      just in case it still isn't clear, it means that the jackpot must be at least as big as what's shown above to make the investment (the extra rake) +EV; in other words, investment vs return when you hit the jackpot.
    • salflip
      salflip
      Bronze
      Joined: 02.10.2007 Posts: 606
      thx for the post by the way

      let us suppose I play a SH NL 25 BBJ table with a 263000 + jackpot

      would I need to make any minor adjustments to maximise my EV

      ie slowplaying, playing more suited conectors and pairs 88+

      in the extremely unlikley event that I could win part of the jackpot

      or would you just play the standard TAG game

      obviously the variance is astronomical!


      with that said my friend took a guys whole stack

      beating his opponents quad jacks with a king high straight flush one time

      unfortunately it wasn't on a BBJ table lol
    • swissmoumout
      swissmoumout
      Bronze
      Joined: 23.02.2007 Posts: 3,385
      don't change your play imo, it'll do more harm than good. In any case if you're at the table when someone hits the jackpot, you'll get part of it, so don't go playing any suited connector etc
    • SonicXT
      SonicXT
      Bronze
      Joined: 15.06.2007 Posts: 4,736
      I don't care whether the jackpot changes the EV, I'm just asking whether the higher amount of fish at the table are enough to pay 50c of extra rake at NL100SH :P
    • swissmoumout
      swissmoumout
      Bronze
      Joined: 23.02.2007 Posts: 3,385
      Originally posted by SonicXT
      I don't care whether the jackpot changes the EV, I'm just asking whether the higher amount of fish at the table are enough to pay 50c of extra rake at NL100SH :P
      dunno, I just join tables where my buddies are, or use GLH to find more... it's only when the BBJ is big (>200k) that I might start joining random BBJ tables...
    • Nunki
      Nunki
      Bronze
      Joined: 25.10.2006 Posts: 865
      Thanks to Swissmount for taking the time to post some tables.

      Originally posted by swissmoumout

      The following tables show when it is +EV to sit at BBJ tables just for the jackpot:

      BBJ Level Required for +EV: Level Limit Full - Short Handed
      $0.10-$0.25 NL____$275,000 - $263,000
      $0.25-$0.50 NL____$330,000 - $328,000
      $0.50-$1.00 NL____$331,000 - $349,000
      $1-$2 NL_________$317,000 - $337,000
      $2-$4 NL_________$322,000 - $307,000
      $3-$6 NL_________$310,000 - $295,000


      $0.50-$1 Limit_____$375,000 - $377,000
      $1-$2 Limit_______$323,000 - $316,000
      $2-$4 Limit_______$324,000 - $314,000
      $3-$6 Limit_______$325,000 - $314,000
      $5-$10 Limit______$321,000 - $328,000
      $10-$20 Limit_____$324,000 - $327,000
      $15-$30 Limit_____$341,000 - $338,000

      The first column is for full-ring games, the second for short handed


      These tables make no sense to me. eg. Since you pay proportionately more rake on the lower limit tables, shouldn't the BBJ theshold be higher on the lower-limit tables. This is not the case here. Also, since the SH games are naturally looser than FR the left-hand column should be smaller than the right since high-rake hurts looser players more than tight ones.

      For NL25SH a 20%VPIP correlates to about a 10PTBB/100 reduction in your win-rate owing to BBJ contributions. What this means is that your ROR (risk of ruin) will go through the roof unless you have a big BR AND play extremely well.

      If you have to play on the BBJ tables then make sure it does not jeoprodize your BR. eg. Play on BBJ tables with only 50% of your gains so as to ensure long-term BR growth.
    • swissmoumout
      swissmoumout
      Bronze
      Joined: 23.02.2007 Posts: 3,385
      Originally posted by Nunki

      These tables make no sense to me. eg. Since you pay proportionately more rake on the lower limit tables, shouldn't the BBJ theshold be higher on the lower-limit tables. This is not the case here. Also, since the SH games are naturally looser than FR the left-hand column should be smaller than the right since high-rake hurts looser players more than tight ones.
      I don't think it's proportional to the normal rake, it's purely BBJ investment vs return (the 50c that'll be raked in every >5$ pot vs the chance of hitting the jackpot). It's lower on NL25 cause often the pot is under 5$. Not 100% sure why it goes down as you move up in limits though :D but then again I'm too lazy to think.
    • Nunki
      Nunki
      Bronze
      Joined: 25.10.2006 Posts: 865
      Originally posted by swissmoumout
      Originally posted by Nunki

      These tables make no sense to me. eg. Since you pay proportionately more rake on the lower limit tables, shouldn't the BBJ theshold be higher on the lower-limit tables. This is not the case here. Also, since the SH games are naturally looser than FR the left-hand column should be smaller than the right since high-rake hurts looser players more than tight ones.
      I don't think it's proportional to the normal rake, it's purely BBJ investment vs return (the 50c that'll be raked in every >5$ pot vs the chance of hitting the jackpot). It's lower on NL25 cause often the pot is under 5$. Not 100% sure why it goes down as you move up in limits though :D but then again I'm too lazy to think.
      To clarify:

      20BB's pot won on BBJ NL25= 17BB's returned to winner. (roughly an extra 10% rake in this case and you need to get your money in as almost a 3:2 favourite HU to break-even in a 20BB pot.)

      20BB's pot won on BBJ NL50= 18BB's returned to winner. (roughly an extra 5% rake in this case.)

      20BB's pot won on BBJ NL600= 19.4BB's returned to winner.

      The difference is huge and the BBJ threshold tables should reflect this. How tightly you and your opponents play will also have a large impact on any such threshold yet this is seemingly not reflected. How can the tables be accurate.

      BBJ tables are categorically bad for your BR at NL25 and quite possibly at other levels as well.
    • swissmoumout
      swissmoumout
      Bronze
      Joined: 23.02.2007 Posts: 3,385
      but isn't the extra rake (fixed rate of 50c) taken only in 5$+ pots?
    • ALuckHeart
      ALuckHeart
      Bronze
      Joined: 23.10.2006 Posts: 25
      Well, I've been playing some sss nl100 lately on pp and the thing is when you're playing fr at this limit it's hard to find enough tables to play at so I decided that I don't care about the 50ct extra rake which is, when winning 20bb 2,5% more rake. I don't think that's too much to pay for having a another 4-5 potential tables I can play at.
      And probably on day I get lucky and 4 8s get beaten by a str8 flush and I get my small amount of the 75% distributed at the table.
      Say it's 10 handed, and I don't expect to be in the hand, from the total amount 18,75% is distributed to the other 8 players sitting in the hand, so each gets 2,34375% of the total jackpot, which still is a decent amount of money and as there's nearly always someone sitting out, waiting 'till bb or sth chances to get around 2,5% are not bad, still sitting at the table where it's happening and not sitting out yourself in the hand is nothing I wouldn't expect to happen.
      But as we're talking about poker, a lot of things happen there you do not expect.

      Edit:
      Originally posted by swissmoumout
      but isn't the extra rake (fixed rate of 50c) taken only in 5$+ pots?
      Yes, but when you're talking abourt 20bb at least, there's no chance sitting at a bbj table where the amount is below 5$.
    • swissmoumout
      swissmoumout
      Bronze
      Joined: 23.02.2007 Posts: 3,385
      Originally posted by ALuckHeart

      Edit:
      Originally posted by swissmoumout
      but isn't the extra rake (fixed rate of 50c) taken only in 5$+ pots?
      Yes, but when you're talking abourt 20bb at least, there's no chance sitting at a bbj table where the amount is below 5$.
      Oh yeah that's right ^^
      Maybe I'll switch my brain back on now >.>
    • Nunki
      Nunki
      Bronze
      Joined: 25.10.2006 Posts: 865
      Originally posted by swissmoumout
      but isn't the extra rake (fixed rate of 50c) taken only in 5$+ pots?
      I have not found any reference to $5 pots or otherwise.

      From PP's website:

      The jackpot contribution will only be collected if the hand is dealt on a jackpot table to four or more players and a rake is collected from the hand

      The jackpot contribution is collected from the pot as soon as the first rake is collected in the hand

      The jackpot contribution of 50 cents is collected only once during the hand
    • ALuckHeart
      ALuckHeart
      Bronze
      Joined: 23.10.2006 Posts: 25
      Originally posted by Nunki
      Originally posted by swissmoumout
      but isn't the extra rake (fixed rate of 50c) taken only in 5$+ pots?
      I have not found any reference to $5 pots or otherwise.

      From PP's website:

      The jackpot contribution will only be collected if the hand is dealt on a jackpot table to four or more players and a rake is collected from the hand

      The jackpot contribution is collected from the pot as soon as the first rake is collected in the hand

      The jackpot contribution of 50 cents is collected only once during the hand
      Well, I dunno where this is, but I'm quite sure I read about the 5$+ thing somewhere. Anyways, this wouldn't make any sense for not giving it a min amount, cuz then they would never start at nl25 when the extra rake is 50ct. Just to underline my point I'll give you the example where the winner of the pot would have to pay extra:

      Let's say you are bb with 27o and sb limps into the hand, the rest folded, and flops sth like 277 or 274 rainbow, sb checks you bet say 1 bb, rake would be 2 ct in this hand, if they take 50ct of every raked hand all you will get is 23ct as the 50ct rake cannot be collected completely from the remaining 48ct.
    • 1
    • 2